Sleepwalking into censorship - <AUTHOR> https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2013/sleepwalking-into-censorship <comment><USER2> > "web forums" and "esoteric material"

Well there you go. Very unspecified. You can kiss "the free internet" goodbye.

This site might even be under threat. It does have the word hacker in its title. Then there are hacking forums related to breaking into systems. Even though we use them for learning about securing systems, I see the government disagreeing.

<comment><USER3> Aren't reddit and HN web forums?

<comment><USER4> Aren't flickr, tumblr, twitter, youtube, and facebook also web forums?

<comment><USER5> Totally, but nobody believes these will be blocked by default.

That's how censorship works. It's arbitrary and at the whims of those in power.

<comment><USER6> Qui tacet consentire videtur.

Silence gives consent.

This demands vigilant civil disobedience in the strongest terms possible. Make camp in Victoria and let Cameron know that this is not okay.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Don't just moan about it online - put your money where your mouth is. If you're in the UK, join the OpenRightsGroup [https://www.openrightsgroup.org/join/](https://www.openrightsgroup.org/join/)

<comment><USER8> And as a short term solution (assuming VPNs will also be outlawed or otherwise made unattractive), take your pick:

[http://torrentfreak.com/vpn-services-that-take-your- anonymit...](http://torrentfreak.com/vpn-services-that-take-your-anonymity- seriously-2013-edition-130302/)

My personal favorite is [https://mullvad.net/en/](https://mullvad.net/en/) because:

a) not US based, therefor not subject to US laws (both known and secret laws/courts)

b) you can send them cash as your payment method (every online payment method such as Paypal, credit card, etc. will establish a link back to you)

c) they don't keep logs

c) you can easily set up multiple "exit" countries (good for circumventing geoblocking)

<comment><USER9> > send them cash

Or Bitcoin, for that matter.

<comment><USER10> Except bitcoin establishes a public, permanent and irrefutable link between yourself (or at least information that, except in specific circumstances, can be linked back to yourself) and the provider.

<comment><USER9> That's easy to avoid - just send the money through a mixer like this one [https://blockchain.info/wallet/send- shared](https://blockchain.info/wallet/send-shared) . Or any Bitcoin exchange or gambling site. Or a combination of three or four. Or you can just buy the bitcoins in person.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> _[X] Extremist and terrorist related content_

That to me looks like a big red flag to classify you as a terrorist if you uncheck the box, if they decide later they don't like you for some other reason.

<comment><USER12> Don't worry! The UK Government _never_ misuses terrorism laws or brings in heavy handed anti-terrorism laws! Just ask all the people in Northern Ireland!

<comment><USER13> And Jean Charles de Menezes.

<comment><USER12> Best not to look a bit foreign when it comes to anti-terrorism stuff in the UK.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Above and beyond the obvious moral debate over whether or not a filtering option _should_ be offered, whether it can be effective, or whether it should be opt-in or opt-out, a number of practical things worry me about having _any_ such architecture in place:

1\. Once you classify web activity it becomes more economical, and arguably even justified in order to carry the cost of maintaining the filter, to make the move to offering a tiered internet service (i.e. having to pay more for access to porn)

2\. Not everyone in a household may have the same preferences, so you'll inevitably want to to start tracking web activity on a _per-person_ basis

3\. Your preferences will be kept by your ISP, probably their partners, and definitely made available to authorities on-demand. "The defendant opted-in to viewing violent pornography Your Honour".

4\. To simplify the design the system will most likely require that all 'hits' in any given category be routed to a web proxy system, even while you're opted-out. You can bet that this will be logged meticulously by someone. Hell, some ISPs may even be brazen enough to offer the 'feature' of alerting parents to their kids activities. So it's potentially, "The defendant opted-in to viewing violent pornography Your Honour, and did so on a regular basis."

5\. Massive potential impact to the robustness and performance of the web. More middle-boxes. Less flexibility to replace protocols, even HTTP 2.0, in the future.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm lucky I live in China. Here I can open any website i want, including adult content, just need 1 second to turn on the SSH, It has been working amazingly for 7 years, since i came to China. It's funny when i go to Hong Kong, and i see the signs warning you about the high fines you will pay if you throw a bit of bread to a bird, or if you smoke while walking on the street. Then when i tell HK people that I live in China and I love it and they say "but is not free there!" I just smile and say "yeah". In Europe you can't even buy a bottle of beer and walk away from the shop at night, If you take off your shirt in a hot day and walk outside people look at you like you are a criminal, while in China it is just normal. There are different kinds of freedom, off course, but the daily-life freedom we enjoy in China is better imho than the European daily-life's "strictly controlled freedom"

<comment><USER16> "In Europe you can't even buy a bottle of beer and walk away from the shop at night"

You are wrong on this.

In which european country is that a problem? Certainly not in Germany. Please be more specific.

<comment><USER17> Well, I'm in Germany and can't buy beer after 10pm.

[http://www.welt.de/vermischtes/article6609694/In-Baden- Wuert...](http://www.welt.de/vermischtes/article6609694/In-Baden-Wuerttemberg- gilt-nachts-Alkoholverbot.html)

<comment><USER16> 1\. This new law only applies to Baden-Wuertemberg (not Europe or Germany) 2\. You can still buy beer at that time in restaurants

<comment><USER17> Yeah but still.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> "There comes a point that it is simply better to place your sales through Amazon and ebay, and circulate your news and promotions exclusively through Facebook and Twitter, as you know none of these will ever be filtered."

Even this is a dangerous opinion. The worst kind of censorship is self- censorship, where just the threat of being filtered causes organisations to self-filter far more than the government has ever asked for, because the boundaries of what is acceptable have never been defined.

You can say "they'd never block facebook", but just the threat of a government mandated social network is enough to get facebook to do what they want.

</comment><comment><USER19> Do what people did when ACTA was about to be signed - protest on the streets. A few tousand people on the streets of most big cities in a country speak to politicians louder than online petition signed by 1 000 000 people.

Polish politicians have learnt their lesson last year and now they know to not even try: [http://rys.io/en/109](http://rys.io/en/109)

<comment><USER20> Why is there always this focus on protesting on streets? It's a serious question. People clearly don't like doing that. Is it old fashioned?

Why does my protest only count when I am on a street, and how can I make non- street based protests count more?

Clicking Like buttons is lazy and meaningless. What's the middle ground?

<comment><USER19> I think that by going to a street protest you show you care enough to spend significant amount of time, so you probably also care enough to go vote against that politician in next elections.

Clicking online poll is just too convenient to mean anything.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Of course it will, because filtering porn was never really the intention in the first place.

<comment><USER22> wait what? Im confused, thanks.

<comment><USER23> My guess is the headline used to be a question. Either that, or the parent accidentally clicked the wrong reply link, or (unlikely) the comment got assigned to the wrong parent by the HN software.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> So if you press "no" on the first screen during setup, you will be not affected by filtering? Somehow, I cannot see the great danger to freedom in that.

Actually, as far as free speech in Britain goes[1][2][3][4][5], that almost sounds like a courtesy.

[1] [http://www.worldmag.com/2013/07/american_street_preacher_arr...](http://www.worldmag.com/2013/07/american_street_preacher_arrested_in_london_for_hate_speech)

[2] [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2330180/Woolwich- att...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2330180/Woolwich-attacks-Man- charged-making-racist-anti-religious-Facebook-comments-British-soldier-s- death.html)

[3] [http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/27/free- speech-o...](http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/27/free-speech-or- hate-speech-britain-bans-u-s-anti-muslim-bloggers/?_r=0)

[4] [http://www.christian.org.uk/rel_liberties/cases/harry_hammon...](http://www.christian.org.uk/rel_liberties/cases/harry_hammond.htm)

[5] [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england- london-23128956](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-23128956)

<comment><USER25> You will be on a list of people who have actively opted out of pornography censorship. Imagine what would happen to your reputation if that list got leaked.

You would be forced into a situation where you would have to explain why you want to receive pornography. While you and I can probably see the fine points of this debate, the general public generally would not.

<comment><USER26> That one doesn't bother me as much as one of the other standard tick boxes on TalkTalks filter, "extremist websites".

Who wants to be on a list of people who have actively said "I want to access extremist websites"?

In fact, why should that even be an option? For the childrens sake, why would we let _anybody_ on those sites? Wouldn't it be better to simply block those sites completely? I mean, we've got the tech place, lists of websites, lets just assume it's ticked for everyone and not display it...

<comment><USER27> Who decides exactly what is "extremist related"?

If a news agency shows the latest Al-Qaeda video, isn't that spreading terrorist ideologies?

But the entire thing is just wrong: If we (the "western" world) does something; how can we criticize oppresive regimes when they do the same thing?

What can we say when Egypt blocks internet access for "national security". What to say about North Korea and their near total censorship to protect the NK culture (and possibly saving their children's innocence).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Some people are afraid that the revolution that took place in north Africa could happen in their country too. It's time to get ready for resistance and underground uncensored information transmission. The 1% starts to fear they may lose control of their domination.

Anyway Cameron has it all wrong, terrorists don't look at porn.

<comment><USER29> haven't you seen all the terrorists on the forum howtomakeabomb.com; clearly we need to censor web forums to stop this!

<comment><USER28> Censoring will stop what ? This is just an attempt to restore obscurantism. If education doesn't work then consider the possibility that that something might be wrong with your assumptions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Horrific. About 80% of what I read would be classed as "esoteric" and the rest probably blocked for some other reason I didn't foresee being included in that list.

</comment><comment><USER31> So is the EU OK with the UK blocking all web forums by default? Any statements, court challenges, etc. yet?

<comment><USER32> Let's see if the UK are even members of the EU in two years. :/

One hopes the trade deal with the US can reel them back in.

I don't think the EU necessarily have the best record on Internet freedom, even though I see many great things about the union.

<comment><USER12> _Let 's see if the UK are even members of the EU in two years. :/_

I can just see the no-to-eu/anti-unionist referendum leaflets now: "The EU is forcing your kids to look at porn! We want to block it, but Brussles says no!"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> My main concern is with regards to who has control of the blacklist. I can imagine site like [http://torrentfreak.com](http://torrentfreak.com) being blocked from the onset, even though it is nothing more than a news aggregation site. How big a jump is it to then block sites like [http://www.pirateparty.org.uk](http://www.pirateparty.org.uk) or maybe even [http://www.openrightsgroup.org](http://www.openrightsgroup.org) itself.

</comment><comment><USER34> I used to think I wouldn't want my kids seeing things on the Internet. I'm beginning to think, let them see it all, in all it's ugly glory. They just might rethink living a moral life?

</comment><comment><USER35> For those wanting to read more about dark patterns in design.. [http://darkpatterns.org/](http://darkpatterns.org/)

</comment><comment><USER36> Was this post not linked to Wired just a few minutes ago?

<comment><USER37> I assume a mod realised the Wired article was just a lazy rehash of this source.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I wonder how much of this is guesswork on the part of Open Rights Group. I'm concerned about censorship but I also want to keep my facts straight.

</comment><comment><USER39> Five Eyes is run by a self interested profit motivated pool of persons who trade insider info such as exploits to use against others.[1] Their treasonous reach is spreading and thankfully people are becoming aware.

People who dare collate information on the persons behind companies like Endgame and Booz Allen have federal resources put upon them. The site[1] linked, started in part by Barrett Brown is part of this battle.[2]

SOS.

[1] [http://wiki.echelon2.org/wiki/Endgame_Systems](http://wiki.echelon2.org/wiki/Endgame_Systems)

[2] [http://www.thenation.com/article/174851/strange-case- barrett...](http://www.thenation.com/article/174851/strange-case-barrett- brown)</comment>


Copenhagenizing Paris - <AUTHOR> http://www.copenhagenize.com/2015/11/copenhagenizing-paris.html <comment><USER2> > the current sub-standard understanding of Best Practice infrastructure

> Best Practice has been established. It's ridiculous to try and reinvent the > wheel.

> It's simple if Paris wants it to be.

If the author thinks that the understanding of "Best Practice" is substandard, maybe he should post a link to what he means, instead of leaving the term undefined and then acting smug about it.

Googling "Best Practice bicycle" returns a number of documents from different cities. It's unclear which of these (if any) correspond to the author's idea of "best practice" for cycling infrastructure.

I did find a post by the same author ([http://www.copenhagenize.com/2013/04/the-copenhagenize- bicyc...](http://www.copenhagenize.com/2013/04/the-copenhagenize-bicycle- planning-guide.html)) which advertises itself as a "planning guide", but is actually just a poster made by someone who was apparently more interested in graphic design than in actually conveying information.

</comment><comment><USER3> As usual with the French left, a lot of wishful thinking but not much will be done (a lot of money will be spent though). I bet you that by 2020 Paris will not be the best bicycle city in the world, far from it.

And btw, we French don't have a bicycle culture. For us every day bicycling (not sport) is for people that can't afford a car (and the rare idealists that think they're going to save the planet).

I'm always amazed at the number of bikes I see when I go in Germany or Holland (never went to Denmark). It's not a matter of money, they are richer than us, it's really cultural.

If you really want to see more bicycles on French roads you need gas to be at about 2€ / liter (Google says it's about 8 bucks for a gallon).

<comment><USER4> As a cyclist (not an idealist though), I consider the major problem in France to be the infrastructure. A lot of people do not use their bike because it is dangerous in the cities and because there are almost no place to park your bike. I suppose it is because of the car culture as you said. It was not considered worth it to invest in it until recently.

<comment><USER5> This. And the fact that Paris has a good metro network coverage.

<comment><USER6> The Paris metro is really nice, but bicycling would be faster if the traffic lights etc were friendly. It's a nice dense city where you could go far in 20 minutes on a bicycle.

On the metro it's easy to waste 20 minutes just on the extras — walking to/from the station, inside the stations, waiting for the trains. Each of these things takes just a few minutes because the stations are close and the trains run often, but few+few+few so easily =30, particularly if you have to change trains.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> FWIW, when you are a Parisian and you know what "copenhagenize" means, someone claiming to "copenhagenize Paris" is not welcomed these days, considering the attacks we just suffered.

<comment><USER7> You've lost me. Can you explain what encouraging safe cycling spaces has to do with the recent attacks, and why the former is considered unwelcome?

<comment><USER5> Copenhagenize is a term that was coined after the second battle of Copenhagen in 1807. During this battle, the British fleet surrounded the city and massively bombarded it to submission. The entire Danish fleet was seized or destroyed. The destruction was so complete that a new word was invented: to "copenhagenize" a city is NOT a nice thing to say.

<comment><USER7> I think you've got your facts a bit wrong:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagenization_(naval)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagenization_\(naval\))

 _" Copenhagenization refers to the practice of confiscating the warships of a defeated enemy."_

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling_advocacy#Copenhageniza...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling_advocacy#Copenhagenization)

 _" Copenhagenization is a design strategy in which urban planning and design are centered on making a city more accessible to bicyclists and pedestrians, and less car dependent"_

I think we can be sensible and infer that they mean the latter, and not some obscure 19th century naval terminology for confiscating ships, and therefore no offence intended.

<comment><USER5> I knew that. The sensible thing to do is not to use a term that has a very violent historical meaning for an unrelated topic. Depending on who you talk to and when, you may not get a positive feedback. That was my point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Cars are for humans, too.

<comment><USER9> Here are 60 humans and the space required to transport them by car, bus and bicycle:

[http://imgur.com/mxGXuuR](http://imgur.com/mxGXuuR)

<comment><USER8> People in prisons take even less space. Freedom is also is in the equation. A car gives me more choices than a bicycle. If there are too much cars (can happen), perhaps this city is becoming too big. Why live in crowded spaces, if there are many alternatives available?

<comment><USER10> i completely agree.

in the future we have less space per person as there are more people, and politically no-one really wants to talk about population growth or demographics (unless they want to encourage people to breed faster).

the car is obviously superior to the bicycle for the reasons you state, it is also obviously inferior in terms of environmental damage.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Study Reveals Big Opportunities in the Sharing Economy - <AUTHOR> http://www.life-connected.com/2010/10/sharing-study-results-part-3-uncovering-big-opportunities-in-the-sharing-economy/

<comment><USER2> Revenue streams are interesting to consider with these sharing focused start- ups. If the values of these users shift to "collaborative consumption", does that decrease or raise questions with advertising as a source of revenue (ethically or effectively)? It seems that a possible underlying value of these ideals is less (or anti) consumerism. Would these users be more open to a 'fee for service' model? (That would be refreshing.)

Side note: Profounder.com is another example of a social lending platform that does not require a fee.

<comment><USER3> From what I can tell there are two camps that are converging: 1) capitalists that want to monetize off the 3rd Economy and 2) resource-based social engineers using a YC-like network of startups to start an internal shared economy. They are both experimental in nature right now and the future of which one will succeed will be determined by how efficiently either one is run. I don't think there's middle ground in the long run.

How would anyone here feel about a crowdfunding platform that would allow people to fund _local_ startups with objects/space/skills instead of money in return for their product(s)? This way no money gets wasted and the funded items are returned (except for the ramen of course) if the startup closes up shop.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Neighborgoods.net charges a fee to "verify" your existence as a real person (how's that for a CAPTCHA?). I like the idea and thought of it like they turned my whole area into a Costco. But I had to pay to get my membership card. On thing their founder has been talking about recently is how more than saving people money, it's having a dramatic effect on communities that embrace it. The idea of sharing might be more powerful than the sharing itself.

</comment><comment><USER5> I like the knowledge sharing example - what about an "exclusive" knowledge sharing forum between certain professionals - say in house lawyers? I know in the time I was a general counsel there were a lot of questions I didn't have the answer to at my fingertips and would have loved a group of similarly qualified professionals to bounce questions and answers off of. Instead I always ended up researching it myself from scratch.

</comment><comment><USER6> I notice in the infographic that physical media has the highest latent demand.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, but the sample size of people who don't share physical media (in an organized way) is also relatively smaller than other categories (thus, high market saturation).

Also, for the purposes of mapping opportunity, latent demand was described as both 1) those who share casually (not through a service or organized community) and 2) those who don't currently share at all but would be interested to. In the case of physical media, I suspect there's more people under #1 than #2.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> An interesting look at how community creates economy.

</comment><comment><USER8> Looks interesting.</comment>


European parliament strongly recommends open source software - <AUTHOR> https://european-pirateparty.eu/european-parliament-strongly-recommends-any-software-developed-by-and-for-the-eu-institutions-to-be-made-publicly-available-under-free-and-open-source-software-licence/ <comment><USER3> The intro of the text makes it look more like a cost cutting measurement. Luckily the end states that "publicly financed software developed for the public sector should be made publicly available under a Free and Open Source Software licence. If it is public money, it should be public code as well."

<comment><USER4> The same statement should apply to research papers; I am happy that the EU is pushing for this as well, with considerable success.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> In addition to open sourcing their own software, I hope governments and the EU will pay developers and maintainers of open source software they use.

<comment><USER6> They should. I think that if there are grants for scientific research, there should also be grants for open source projects.

Right now there is a complete framework for research grants (national organizations and the European Research Council), but afaict no such thing exists for open source projects. I think this should change.

Also, there should be structural government support for security hardening/audits.

<comment><USER7> They have been giving out grants for Checking security of open source software. I think that in the past projects such as Rust and curl have gotten grants to make a review of the code.

<comment><USER6> Certainly, but how large was the budget?

Then compare it to the 10-100 billion euros spent annually on scientific research [1].

I'm not saying that the budgets should be equal, but there should be _some_ proportionality.

I also think it should be easier for universities to have scientific programmers (who would write open source software) on their payroll.

It's especially important for Europe as more research on open protocols means that the internet can become less dependent on large US corporations. And for this type of research you'd need developers.

[1] [https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01566-z](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01566-z)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Relevant: [https://publiccode.eu](https://publiccode.eu)

</comment><comment><USER9> The bigger problem from my experience is that there's too much duplication of efforts because of how grant money is distributed.

I think it would make a lot of sense to have some sort of voting system where institutions could propose and vote OSS packages and make grants available while making sure teams worked together.

The team I worked in had for some reason invested in creating a full-fledged python interpreter that loaded CERNs ROOT framework and had that many finicky dependencies that the team just shared an ubuntu image with everything installed. And that was some auxiliary setup, we were building hardware systems for precise timming until the team realized that another team _from the same institution_ was working on a similar problem with 10x the budget.

<comment><USER10> You'd think it would be easy to track with a database of "Active projects" with tags, easily searchable, and a point on the to-do list: "Check for the existence of projects with similar functionality before starting a new one"

<comment><USER11> But the problem is wider than just not knowing what others are doing.

Grant money for writing things tends to encourage everyone to start their own thing, because having something you own is a good story to tell, it makes you look like a leader (at least in your reports) in a way that contributing bug- fixes to someone else's project simply doesn't. (In commerce it's the other way around, the guy with many clients can split the cost, and thus give more functionality per dollar, and thus out-compete the little guys.)

GP's suggestion of giving end-uses some kind of tickets to distribute to software they use, and then pay its developers, sounds like a smart way to encourage consolidation.

<comment><USER9> The whole EU grant process it's a giant mess. I've seen job postings for developers where the most important required skill was knowing the grant process and how to write successful proposals (which is an art form itself).

This has provided a specially perverse incentive for people that are involved in both academia and politics.

I know of a certain emeritus professor that was particularly involved in national politics (spain did not have that many engineers 60 years ago), his engineering skills are average at best, since he has spent his whole life working the politics of academia. That said, he had so many titles and awards that just his qualifications earned the company he created a lot of points towards getting substantial grants. The startup has been getting >1M€/year since 2014 from the EU, plus indirect investment from private firms that can claim special benefits. All money they get they "invest" into getting stuff like patents, that allow them to claim IP with made up value.

They actually have a patent for a robot architecture for which there's no analytic solution to inverse kinematics, meaning that instead of having a trigonometric formula for computing the position of the robot, we had to do an exhaustive search simulating the position of the robot in 3d space until we were close enough.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> If only this extended to open data as well.

I started developing what was to be an open source nutritional planning app and found this project ([https://www.eurofir.org/](https://www.eurofir.org/)) which is apparently funded by heaps of my tax money.

I can't tell you how frustrating it is to not be allowed to use that data for public good.

</comment><comment><USER13> I am very glad to see this - I have been banging on about this (unsuccessfully) for years - [http://oss4gov.org/](http://oss4gov.org/)

Good news, even if it is _only_ EU parliament.

Edit: one thing i do think will help adoption is credentialed support - <USER2> it's pretty obvious I can always find some other company who knows Apache httpd - but far less obvious if I want to use a mid-ranking piece of OSS and if we are having to build our own OSS system (say something to manage building planning permission).

But if there were consortiums of OSS ISPs who could cross certify on a given piece of software it would get over one of the huge if not hugest problem - who do I call if there is a problem and are they credible?

</comment><comment><USER14> I recall several European nations switching government systems over to Linux only to have Microsoft worm their way back in a few years later. Let's hope it's permanent this time.

<comment><USER15> I think basically Linux didn't work that well for them more than "MS worming their way back in". It sounded pretty pragmatic in the case of Munich from what I read.

<comment><USER16> Interestingly Munich are switching back to Linux again:

[https://www.zdnet.com/article/linux-not-windows-why- munich-i...](https://www.zdnet.com/article/linux-not-windows-why-munich-is- shifting-back-from-microsoft-to-open-source-again/) [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23190447](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23190447)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I don't know, the only positive thing that can be said about some software is that it is open source. In the past it has been more profitable to sell my time at an insane hourly rate to keep a pile of crap running yet I struggle to sell simple SaaS solution. Lack of product market fit on my part and I'll keep working on it, but in the mean time I am not going to take this sanctimonious talk about OSS by politician that are better paid then me and have a pension plan to boot. We are all rent seeking but I don't hold my nose up to those doing the hard work and try to shame them out of their hard earned money.

</comment><comment><USER18> [https://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/informatics/open- sourc...](https://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/informatics/open-source- software-strategy_en)

[https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/open-source- observato...](https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/open-source-observatory- osor)

</comment><comment><USER19> I am curious if the recommendation would had been the same if the EU had any serious stake in the software development industry. I try to think of any piece of software that I use daily that is not imported from the US, and I struggle.

<comment><USER20> The EU gave us Spotify, SoundCloud, Minecraft, and Angry Birds. There's plenty of EU software companies you've heard of.

It's true that most brand name consumer software is from (companies headquartered in) America right now, though all of the major companies also have dozens of offices in Europe. (Chrome's V8 was famously written in Denmark, before Google even had an office in that country.) Are you suggesting this could be a response to American companies hiring people in EU countries, but avoiding paying their share of corporate taxes there? That's possible, but it doesn't sound to me like that's the reason.

I think it's at least as likely they're hedging against the different countries in the EU each developing their own (incompatible) software and playing against each other. In politics and business, America tends towards "market will solve all", while the EU tends towards "there's dozens of us so we need to cooperate to get anything done".

Maybe they looked at America and saw it as a cautionary tale. California has a massively disproportionate power over everything related to computers today. Europe has a bit of history with one member state trying to exert a disproportionate power over the rest.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Interesting that there is no mention of using Lunux or FreeBSD.

</comment><comment><USER22> And they're experts in ... spending other people's money and telling others what to do.

Members of the EU Parliament & Pirates have contributed close to 0 lines of code to OSS. Thank you for your service!

<comment><USER23> Actually, the European Commission and the EP had a program under witch they identified open source software used in the institutions and paid developers maintaining them to fix bugs. Nodepad++ was one of the programs as far as I know.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Don't get ur hope up, Wikipedia is the best side ever, but it is run on the worst software ever, WikiMedia, I'd think that with the 100 million they get in donation every year it would be better.

<comment><USER17> Seriously they don't even have a WYSIWYG, I've build a WYSIWYG, and it was fun and profitable. This is what u don't get, OpenOffice did not beat MsOffice, no close sourced google cloud did, in the mean time they changed their name to LibreOffice because of some tiresome disagreement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I wonder how that plays together with their intent to firewall the European internet, track it and otherwise mirror Chinese development. Seems like plain PR to me.

[https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/6487...](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/648784/IPOL_STU\(2020\)648784_EN.pdf)

<comment><USER25> > their intent

This study does not express the intent of the EU or the European Parliament, but is the opinion of their authors, all working for the same company (Future Candy).

<comment><USER24> This document is by the Policy department of the EP. That a company wrote it does not mean that it's their opinion - somebody from the Policy department requested and oversaw it, and then accepted it and published for their managers (the von der Leyen administration itself) to use.

<comment><USER25> Fron the document itself:

"DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament."</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Tail recursion with asyncio - <AUTHOR> http://calebmadrigal.com/recursion-with-asyncio/

<comment><AUTHOR> Another little benefit of this approach I just thought of: if you have a really complex CPU-bound calculation, this method could prevent it from blocking everything else in your event loop.</comment>


V2 rockets on London and surrounding counties - <AUTHOR> https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?ll=52.042355%2C0.582275&spn=1.520457%2C3.488159&t=m&oe=UTF8&msa=0&source=embed&ie=UTF8&mid=zrRJwnXeepqg.k97NVjPZOOy0 <comment><USER2> Such maps always remind me of this polandball joke: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blitz_map_of_London_...](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blitz_map_of_London_\(Polandball\).png)

This episode of Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast shows how civilized societies could justify to themselves to do fire or nuclear bombing: [http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore- history-42-blitz-l...](http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore- history-42-blitz-logical-insanity/)

</comment><comment><USER3> My Grandmother remembers the one that landed in Usk road. They lived a few streets away in Ballentine street. In the previous years they had an incendiary bomb land in their roof that was (thankfuly) only burning slowly. My teenage father had to go up into the loft and remove it.

On another occasion one burned through the lid of their fairly new dustbin. Dustbins were very very hard to get hold of then - like anything made of metal. Previously my Grandmother referred to Hitler as "Herr Hitler", after that it was "That bloody man". My Father knew at that moment that Hitler would lose the war.

</comment><comment><USER4> It's scary to look at an area of the city where friends and family live and see just how many people died there. Frequently 10 or 20, the highest number is 168 when a V2 dropped on a Woolworths in New Cross.

These things hit the ground at around 1800 mph. I guess when you get absolutely no warning there's no time to seek shelter.

<comment><USER5> This prompted me to look up UK total civilian casualties at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#Human_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#Human_losses_by_country) , giving the surprisingly small figure of 67,200 (including commonwealth!). We didn't do so badly when you look at some of the other horrifying figures in that table.

That figure of total civilian deaths is also smaller than the death toll of either of the two nuclear bomb attacks or the firebombing of Tokyo. The RAF firebombing of Dresden has unclear casualty figures but seems to be about 20,000.

Edit: thinking about it, the difference between that low number and the others is really the debt owed to the "few" of Fighter Command and the ability to maintain air superiority over England and the Channel, preventing truly extensive bombing and an invasion.

<comment><USER6> For truly 'extensive bombing' the Germans would have required heavy bombers, which they did not possess. The Luftwaffe had been largely conceived of as a support to ground troops with no strategic role or capability. Also they wasted their efforts on civilian centres such as London before they had achieved air superiority by destroying the RAF, which they came very close to doing in the late summer of 1940.

<comment><USER7> They never came close to getting air superiority, or pushing the RAF away from the South England Airfields.

This is a persistent claim that has no support with experts of WW2, but somehow the story is just to good not to be retold by every tv movie and school book. Its a popularised myth with no truth.

Neither is it true that Churchill deliberately attacked German cities to stop the Luftwaffe from attacking the RAF Airfields.

Churchill speeches and dramatisation is not the same as actual history, no matter how often people repeat the same tale.

<comment><USER8> Do you know of any detailed source on all that, ideally something like [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0813338697](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0813338697) ?

The only thing I can add to this debate with my current knowledge is that the British foiled the start of a campaign against the Chain Home radars after the Luftwaffe's first Maximum Effort against one station. Devastation was wreaked, but one or more boffins who showed up to see what could be done observed that there was one functioning transmitter, and jury rigged an antenna for it.

When the Luftwaffe did ECM reconnaissance they couldn't distinguish between it and a functioning station, and concluded that approach wasn't going to work.

Can't remember my source for it, a quick check of the index indicates it wasn't R.V. Jones' superb _Most Secret War_.

<comment><USER7> Usually I would not recommend a podcast, however this podcast goes threw the Battle of Britan in extrem detail comparing gains and loses for every single day (!).

[http://worldwariipodcast.net/](http://worldwariipodcast.net/)

If you want a book, this is a good start: [http://www.amazon.com/Battle- Britain-Roy-Conyers-Nesbit/dp/0...](http://www.amazon.com/Battle-Britain-Roy- Conyers-Nesbit/dp/0752456520/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> WOW I had no idea how many landed in London. I always thought that they were inaccurate and weren't effective. Sure would have terrorized me and came close to Big Ben.

<comment><USER10> Good thing they didn't have any on-board guidance systems back then.

<comment><USER11> The V2 used pendular integrating gyroscopic accelerometers (PIGAs) and gyroscopes for guidance. As far as I know, the V2 was the first use of the PIGA. Descendants of the V2 guidance systems were used by the Apollo moon missions and several US intercontinental ballistic missiles.

The PIGA is actually a pretty cool piece of machinery. You have a free- swinging balance arm that has a mass and a gyroscope on it. The gyroscope's axis of rotation is aligned with the balance arm. An electric motor spins the whole balance arm in a direction perpendicular to both the gyroscope's axis of rotation and the axis about which the balance is free to rotate. So if you remember from Freshman physics, you have a rotational momentum and an applied torque, the resultant torque is the cross product of the two (in other words, a torque in the direction the balance moves freely). An analog controller keeps the electric motor spinning at a rate that keeps the balance beam level. So, the rate the electric motor is turning is proportional to acceleration in the direction of the electric motor's axis. Thus, the integral of the acceleration is proportional to the integral of the rotational velocity of the electric motor. In other words, the number of revolutions of the electric motor is proportional to the velocity of the rocket (relative to free-fall). A simple revolution counter is sufficient to cut off the engine's fuel flow once the rocket has reached a given velocity.

(Source: I interned at Draper Lab, which made the Apollo guidance systems and several ICBM guidance systems. I walked by an Apollo PIGA in a display case every morning.)

<comment><USER10> Fascinating. Thanks for sharing.

I meant in terms of GPS-based which would improve the accuracy. Sorry for being a bit flippant with my original comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Interesting as I've recently started re-reading Gravity's Rainbow, again, for the third time.

<comment><USER13> I guess Slothrop's prediction rate wasn't so unlikely given the density of those impacts :)

<comment><USER14> It seems the guy really did get around... 0_0

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Just visited DC area, USA and went to the Smithsonian Air and Space museum. That have a V2 on display there. It gives one a palpable impression of their power especially in WWII.

<comment><USER16> There's also one on display in London at the Imperial War Museum near Lambeth North. I'd read a lot about them, and seen pictures, but it was still far bigger than I expected.

<comment><USER17> And one just chilling out by the London Bridge train station.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> see also [http://www.bombsight.org/](http://www.bombsight.org/)</comment>


Loglisp: An Alternative to Prolog (1982) - <AUTHOR> https://aitopics.org/download/classics:4A93472A <comment><USER2> The first author of this is John Alan Robinson, inventor of the first unification algorithm and thus the first practical resolution theorem proving algorithm, on which Prolog was developed.

I remember reading a history of Prolog, I think by Kowalski, which mentioned that Robinson always preferred Lisp to Prolog, despite it being built on his ideas. I'll try and dig out a reference.

Edit: I found the article I was thinking of [1], on Maarten van Emden's blog. Here is the quote:

> A few years later some excited evangelists brought Robinson the news that > resolution had led to a new programming language. Robinson was delighted to > see some sample programs and an explanation of how resolution was used to > execute them. The evangelists took it for granted that henceforth Robinson > would program in Prolog. They were disappointed to learn that no, for > Robinson Lisp was the one and only programming language and that it could > not even be displaced by an elegant embodiment of his own brain child.

[1]: [https://vanemden.wordpress.com/2017/09/08/conceptual- integri...](https://vanemden.wordpress.com/2017/09/08/conceptual-integrity- why-it-matters-and-how-to-get-it/)

<comment><USER3> Do you know texts about the stratchey / landin school of thought ? I'd love to read about purely denotational interpreters. I found a few things about both but it never explained their ideas in these terms.

ps: oh well, these slides about the british computing history links a few texts [http://sml-family.org/history/ML2015-talk.pdf](http://sml- family.org/history/ML2015-talk.pdf)

<comment><USER2> I don't know much to point you at sorry, apart from general works on denotational semantics.

<comment><USER3> thanks nonetheless

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm glad to see a classic article linked from AITopics. We have a big collection there, as well as articles from NeurIPS, AAAI conferences, AI Journal, and news sources, amounting to 200k+ items, all fully classified into AI topics. Have a look!

[https://aitopics.org/](https://aitopics.org/)

<comment><USER4> Here is more information about the Loglisp paper: [https://aitopics.org/doc/classics:4A93472A](https://aitopics.org/doc/classics:4A93472A)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think minikanren in racket or core.logic in clojure nicely fill this gap now.

<comment><USER6> Like hundreds of other embeddings of logic languages.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The classic textbook Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs has a chapter on implementing a logic programming language embedded in Scheme. [source: [https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/sicp/full- text/...](https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/sicp/full- text/book/book-Z-H-29.html#%_sec_4.4)]

<comment> white-flame While SICP is certainly a great book, more direct to the topic would be a different classic:

Norvig's _Paradigms of AI Programming_ is purely about creating logic & unification systems in Lisp, and the foundation of many codebases still in use today.

[https://github.com/norvig/paip-lisp](https://github.com/norvig/paip-lisp)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I prefer picat or mercury as better and more modern prolog's.

There are not do many logical extensions still, just typesystems and contracts getting better recently (Ada spark, ATS), bug a real prolog with a real SAT solver are way better.

<comment><USER9> How's Mercury doing these days?

<comment><USER8> Not so good, I think. Picat is fine (but no types, no native compilation), spark and ATS got better recently.</comment></comment></comment>


My 2017 timesheet; I have 100% time tracking for the last 24 months - <AUTHOR> https://infogram.com/2016-vs-2017-time-breakdown-1h7j4d0x7lyd2nr <comment><AUTHOR> I use basic calendaring tools like iCal or Google Calendar to manually track my historical data, silo'd into 12 different calendars which represent categories of time spent. I've become comfortable enough in the software interface to only spend ~3-5m day updating. This time investment is acceptable for now, I haven't found the right solution to automate the entirety of this data collection accurately.

In this view (historical calendar) I simply want to have a log/journal for each day which I can reference in the future. I don't want to write the details of my D&D session with friends on the calendar, I just want to know we played D&D and where we did it. If there ARE things I want to recall, I can put them in the notes field with ease.

I group together by color for at-a-glance insights. Blue = daily routines, health & wellness. Red = purely escapism or distraction from my goal. Green = goal-oriented work or billable work. .

When I'm working on devices I have RescueTime Premium installed which gives me a high granularity look on how I spend my screen-time. I have the luxury of being a self-employed developer and thus can more or less direct my energy into what interests me and also make money doing so, but as many of you may know this takes discipline and self-awareness.

Problems I've found include centralized goal-setting, task planning and in- tool time metrics. There have been some solutions out there that haven't really succeeded. GCal has actually made great strides this past year in improving their core product overall... I still don't think its perfect but that's obviously subjective. Big thanks to your team, if you're reading this.

I like low-friction, high-flexibility tools. I'd love to build a more detailed "continuous integration for humans," but I'm not ready to share any of that work yet it's all in ideation phase and needs revision before publishing.

To accomplish this I keep calendars for around 10 categories of what I spend my time doing. It's created a nice dataset useful to basically me.

I also use a Huginn installation in my server rack (a laptop on my bookshelf lol) to automate things like Harvest time tracking into calendar items and some other business-logic level tasks. I hope to explore more of this in 2018!

All in all it's an experiment in self awareness. The rough hypothesis is that if I'm collecting more data about myself I'll become more self aware of positive and negative behavior patterns. Certainly this isn't a new concept, but with the ease of collection I don't see a reason to stop or slow down.

</comment><comment><USER2> Can you elaborate on your data collection? What devices and software did you use? I would like to try it myself :)

</comment><comment><USER3> You should exercise alot more.</comment>


10/GUI : The Video - <AUTHOR> http://10gui.com/video/ <comment><USER2> Does anyone know if the new Wacom Bamboo with multitouch exposes the "raw" touch events so that apps can use them, specifically on OSX?

Looking at [1], it seems like there's a fair chance that they're available, but that file hasn't been updated since before the new models were released.

If the touch events are available, it should be possible to do a pretty decent implementation of some of their ideas on a standard OSX install.

[1] [http://www.wacomeng.com/devsupport/downloads/mac/macosx/EN00...](http://www.wacomeng.com/devsupport/downloads/mac/macosx/EN0056-NxtGenImpGuideX.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER3> Or see <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=877535></comment>


What Mental Models would you want to instill in your children? - <AUTHOR> I have two sons, and I want them to grow up with useful mental frameworks about the world.  What mental models have you come to believe that you wish you had adopted earlier?
Here are three I've been contemplating.
1) When I fail at something, it is not an indictment of my moral being.  On the contrary, failures make me a better person.
2)My formal education may incentivize me to find correct answers to solvable problems.  But I will explore problems that don't have an answer, since these are the ones that change society.
3)Curiosity is the foundation of understanding.  When I disagree with someone, I will seek to understand rather than attack. <comment><USER2> One I instilled in my own children: People do things for a reason. In most cases, that reason is about them, not you. In most cases, finding out why they do things will get you further in resolving interpersonal problems than just assuming malfeasance.

</comment><comment><USER3> Almost everything you interact with was designed and built by people like you. Understanding why those things work the way they do, and are made the way they are, is powerful.

You don't need permission from someone else to start working on something that interests you, nor do you need to know everything about how to start.

<comment><USER4> I love this "nor do you need to know everything about how to start".

It's hard to encourage adults to try to learn new things. Myself included. I hope that by reinforcing learning and experimenting with my children they can have a higher tolerance to the fear associated with 'starting'.

<comment><USER5> caveat - unless it's dangerous. e.g. don't mess with electricity or chemicals.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I tell my kids 3 things.

1) If you want to be good at something, practice. 2) Everyone can make mistakes, own up to yours and don't blame your brother for things you have done. If I find out you will be punished. 3) Learn how to win and loose with grace.

My kids school teaches my oldest 6 things which I can really get behind.

Agency

 _Every member of our community takes ownership! We take responsibility for making sure that our schools and scholars are reaching the highest possible standards across the board._

Curiosity

 _Our schools are fueled by wonder. Scholars, teachers, and staff always ask, "What if?"_

Try & Try

 _Our entire community understands that tackling tough challenges takes elbow grease, grit, and perseverance._

Integrity

 _We are honest, open, and transparent._

Others

 _We never forget to look out for each other. From helping someone on a project to smiling in the hallways, we build a community of mutual respect and support._

No Shortcuts

 _Excellent learning takes time and effort._

</comment><comment><USER7> Probably the most common in our house:

1\. The world doesn't own you or owe you. At the end of the day, your fate is decided by the sum of your own actions.

2\. It's ok to fall, but do not wallow. Get up. Learn. Move on.

3\. Life is earned in struggle. Anything is achievable with enough work. Never allow yourself to be convinced great can be made easily.

4\. Always be kind, but be willing to be unkind.

5\. Love yourself. If you find otherwise, refer to rule 2.

</comment><comment><USER8> I just want my kids to be nice people.

<comment><USER9> I hope they become nice people with teeth. Wimpy nice people get the snot kicked out of them.

<comment><USER10> Where did you grow up? Or when?

<comment><USER9> On both sides of the tracks in the 80s. However, the danger to the naive/nice is universal and timeless. Every oral tradition has tales of hidden dangers in the seemingly benign. In this message I, as a person, as an individual, am of no consequence.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Awesome question. I also have two small boys and I think about these same things. I'm also hesitant about conventional education and sometimes wish that if I had the financial means, I might like to home-school them (at least for some of their schooling years).

Some random thoughts:

* I think failure is glorified in a way that is not healthy, particularly in the startup field. Try to optimise for success [https://signalvnoise.com/posts/1555-learning-from-failure-is...](https://signalvnoise.com/posts/1555-learning-from-failure-is-overrated)

* Like you, I'd like to find the right/correct answer but lately it's the context that's more important. Helping my boys put this int practise would be valuable I think - more-so in human relationships than STEM pursuits.

* If I can humble myself to learn how to learn about someone else's point of view, rather than attacking and trying to pull them around to my view, then I'll be setting a good example to my boys. I don't what them to think they have to agree or even tolerate other's points of view, but they should respect that someone else holds something different, even (especially) when they don't agree with it.

* I'd also like them to build strong convictions to what they believe. I'd like them to use science and evidence to support things but at the same time, many things in life that are important, have to be taken on some measure of faith - I'd like my boys to have the resolve to choose a foundation they agree with and resist external influence if it's very important to them.

</comment><comment><USER11> The classical Trivium, [https://www.classicalconversations.com/trivium- education.htm](https://www.classicalconversations.com/trivium-education.htm)

Questions or Answers? [http://kiriakakis.net/comics/mused/a-day-at-the- park](http://kiriakakis.net/comics/mused/a-day-at-the-park)

</comment><comment><USER12> 4) you have the right to exist and my love for you is independent of anything you can say, be or do.

This includes your beliefs and mental models and attitude toward my best intentions for your life.

I do this with the awareness that in case of contradiction, their personal experience and my modeling beat anything I may say.

</comment><comment><USER13> Among great advice in here, of which I'd also instill upon my children, I'll show them how to work with a cash budget.

Money management was heavily glossed-over (or outright ignored) in an otherwise great public school system, for my wife and I.

I didn't know I had a problem until I was in an expensive college, taking out student loans, and living beyond my means.

This will only get worse/harder for children who grow up with no concept of cash at all (I missed that by a couples years, anyway).

</comment><comment><USER14> 1\. What matters is what I give to society, not what society gives to me. People are reciprocative, so giving more to society means getting more things back in the long run, even if I am not good at things like negotiating.

2\. Be honest. Credibility is something everyone starts with. But once you lose it, you don't get it back. It's also quite rare and easy. A lot of people will simply pick an honest person over someone more skilled but less honest.

</comment><comment><USER15> We live in a world where less and less you can make a good income from a 'job'. Erosion of the middle class, and all that.

So learn how to live within your means, and invest money to make it work harder for you. Love your job, but enjoy being able to quit it whenever you like and take a rest because you've set yourself up.

<comment><USER16> True, and yet...

"Money is like gasoline during a road trip. You don't want to run out of gas on your trip, but you're not doing a tour of gas stations. You have to pay attention to money, but it shouldn't be about the money." \- Tim O'Reilly

You need to teach good money habits. They're important for your kids to know. You _also_ need to teach that money is not the central focus of life. That's at least as important.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Great question! And terrific answers so far ;)

Cultivating true friendships is so important at that age. Its a learning process and a skill that must be continuously reinforced. And it opens one up to a foundational belief. That you will be defined by the people you surround yourself with in life.

</comment><comment><USER18> 1) you have the potential to become good at something if you put effort towards it.

2) in order to learn and get better at something, you sometimes have to make mistakes

3) you do not always have to know the answer, just understand the question

</comment><comment><USER19> I'm teaching my kids how to solve the Rubik's Cube and also how to juggle. Both teach them mental and physical dexterity and show the reward of sticking with something even when it's difficult.

</comment><comment><USER20> I hope this helps. [https://www.fs.blog/mental- models/](https://www.fs.blog/mental-models/)

</comment><comment><USER21> Your thoughts and emotions are things that you perceive, not things that you are. They can be ignored if they aren't helpful, or changed for the better through practice.

</comment><comment><USER16> Re #3: However, your sons' mental models need to include that sometimes people are dishonest and/or manipulative.

</comment><comment><USER22> Always stand in shoes of the other person and look at things from his perspective.

</comment><comment><USER5> number one is: failure the greatest teacher is.

</comment><comment><USER23> Listen.

</comment><comment><USER24> @all who have done it: How noticeable was the impact on your children with the particular mental model?</comment>


The lightest Android launcher ever - <AUTHOR> http://kisslauncher.com

<comment><USER2> If it's open source please submit it to F-Droid [1].

[1] [https://f-droid.org/](https://f-droid.org/)

<comment><USER3> It is! Code is on [https://github.com/Neamar/KISS](https://github.com/Neamar/KISS)

I'll submit to fdroid very soon, thanks for the suggestion.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> How does this compare feature-wise to Nova Launcher or Trebuchet?

<comment><USER3> It's built to be different. No fancy apo drawer and endless screens of icons, just a very smart search interface and clever suggestions to place app and contacts at the core of the phone experiment. Your launcher deserve to be as unobtrusive as possible. And that's what KISS aims to be.</comment></comment>


Opening the Open Library of Humanities - <AUTHOR> https://about.openlibhums.org/2015/09/28/olh-launches/ <comment><AUTHOR> More details in the full editorial piece: [https://olh.openlibhums.org/articles/10.16995/olh.46/](https://olh.openlibhums.org/articles/10.16995/olh.46/)</comment>


Ask HN: Less-than-good code quality for initial open source release? - <AUTHOR>

I've been working for several months on a project which I'll be open sourcing. There's a fully functional prototype, but the code quality of this prototype is really, really rough. (e.g., this was my first full-blown JavaScript project)
A total rewrite, which I've already started, will take 2-3 months. In the meantime I want to a) have something tangible to show for my efforts so far (e.g., I'm actually looking for work at the moment), as well as to receive feedback about the general idea of the project itself.
I'm strongly considering posting code for the working prototype on Github now along with mentioning that it is being rewritten. Is this feasible/recommendable, or would I be doing more harm than good by releasing with less-than-great initial code quality? <comment><USER2> Working code is way better than broken code. And there's the aphorism of "If you're not embarrassed by your initial release, you're launching too late." I say release now; if nothing else, it should drive you to improve what you've got.

<comment><USER3> Agreed. Some is better than none, and fugly code is better than no code. As long as you have a clear mention that you're working to improve the code's quality, most (competent) people should respect that.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback and the push, guys - I'm going to go for it! (and have already started taking the next steps to do so)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> A full-rewrite might take 2-3 months, but that doesn't mean you can't release bits of it incrementally as you refactor them. Release what you have now as version 0, and then release minor version updates as you rewrite. That's what I'd do.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your comments. That's along the lines of what I'm thinking of, but want a few objective opinions as a sanity check.</comment></comment>


Trying to find an article about the extreme lasting value of Text - <AUTHOR> So I read this deeply inspiring article/blog post which discussed in detail concepts such as hieroglyphics, compressibility, comparison to imagery, lasting value, communication per bit value, explanatory power, non-degradable characteristics of the text format.  And more.
I really want to find it again, but seem to be having trouble. Would appreciate anyone's help; I know one of you here has also read it, and if not, when we find it, you definitely should.
Thanks so much! <comment><USER2> This series? [http://crackingthenutshell.com/what-is-information- part-2a-i...](http://crackingthenutshell.com/what-is-information- part-2a-information-theory/)

I don't think you mean this one: [http://www.tutorialspoint.com/cryptography/cryptography_quic...](http://www.tutorialspoint.com/cryptography/cryptography_quick_guide.htm)

Maybe this? [http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/18/bit-rot- the-...](http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/18/bit-rot-the- internetneverforgetsaordoesit.html)

From this forum post: [https://www.zombiehunters.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1117...](https://www.zombiehunters.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=111775)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, these all look interesting but weren't the original source I was looking for. I'm adding them to my reading list regardless

u/brettkromkamp found it. Always bet on text!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Always Bet On Text: [http://graydon.livejournal.com/196162.html](http://graydon.livejournal.com/196162.html) (original: [http://graydon2.dreamwidth.org/193447.html](http://graydon2.dreamwidth.org/193447.html))

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes!! Love ya. Seriously, thanks.</comment></comment>


Taming Complexity with Reversibility - <AUTHOR> https://www.facebook.com/notes/kent-beck/taming-complexity-with-reversibility/1000330413333156

<comment><USER2> Amazon has a leadership principle ([http://www.amazon.jobs/principles](http://www.amazon.jobs/principles)) that seems to be related:

"Bias for Action

Speed matters in business. Many decisions and actions are reversible and do not need extensive study. We value calculated risk taking."

Interesting correlation with Kent Beck's note that "Not all decisions are reversible ... the two kinds of decisions need to follow completely different workflows."

Anecdotally, I've observed that the leaders that can distinguish between these two types of decisions and learn not to sweat the small stuff increase their teams' velocities by increasing the confidence that you can do the right thing now and handle the outcome when it comes.

</comment><comment><USER3> I do get annoyed with any example that begins by harkening to the success of a forerunner. Ford had amazing success. He also had some solid competition and the parts of Ford's success that are often cited are not necessarily the path to success in today's world. (Nor were his competitors all losers...)

To give the article credit, it does mention later troubles Ford faced. But more as a lip service to deflect any criticism that entire section could receive.

The rest of this comes down to hedging your bets and return on investment. Nobody really cares about anyone that had to pivot during their execution. Indeed, often we forget the pivots that companies had to do. To that end, being able to pivot (i.e., reverse a decision) is a very important skill. Is it a "double win" if you automate that? Depends. Did it cost more to automate the reversal than it would have to just manually do it?

Seriously, the cost of building a solution should be considered with the value it will provide. If what you are building will not cost less than the extra value it will provide. Than it likely isn't providing value. You don't get double points for how a solution was built. You only get value out of things that add value.</comment>


Things I've learned to recruit great hackers - <AUTHOR> http://www.currentlyobsessed.com/2010/04/09/3-things-ive-learned-to-recruit-great-hackers/

<comment><USER2> Not too relevant, given the title i expected something more.

<comment><USER3> headline fails - the new spam

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't really get why a hacker would take a contract position before going on full time. When I look for jobs I have my choice of several options. A contract position is pretty much the worst thing you could offer me. In fact I don't think it's ever happened to me.

<comment><USER5> I feel the same way about W2 positions; but yeah, uh, if you are going for someone who is good (and who is recognised as good... not all good programmers are recognised as such.) they aren't desperate, and they are unlikely to take a contracting position if they want a W2 (and visa-versa) without a large premium.

<comment><USER6> A lot of good people in niche areas have their own projects and goals and don't mind picking up part-time work if it fits in with their goals. This might not describe the guy you want running your server, but its the way a LOT of creative freelancers work.

Just anecdotally, two of my best hires started working for me in some part- time capacity before coming on full-time. In these cases, hiring part-time ended up being a kind of courtship. Especially since people instinctively judge most jobs by the salary, if you've got a small but growing company, hiring part-time can be a useful way of ramping up help while controlling costs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Although short, the last bit about focusing on a single school is important. Electronic Arts does some heavy recruiting at my school, including tours and talks with our student ACM chapter.

I know it works because they got me to intern there twice. :P

<comment><USER5> ah, but will you continue working there if/once you have options?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> "He writes about startup things that haven't already been written about 9000 times."

Probably he only found these 3 not published exactly 9000 times of all the things he had in mind. That's just deadly info retrieval. ;-)

But I too agree on the last point. We see it happening all the time.</comment>


"Problems" with git format-patch - <AUTHOR> https://firstname.lastname@example.com/ <comment><USER2> Gmail is wrong? And no surprise there.

Don't get me wrong: having written enough email-stuff myself, I can fully sympathize with Linus.

That said: Just like the worldwide web is quickly turning into whatever Google pushes through Chrome and their web assets, internet email now slowly seems to become whatever Gmail does or supports. Which is terrible.

90% of the programming guides for various languages and libraries now are _not_ "This is how you send an internet email using SMTP from $X", they are "This is how you send a _Gmail_ from $X".

And all that's because of one single thing only: Market-share.

Get off Gmail. Get off Chrome. And help others do that too. Help bring down that market-share, and you may help restore balance to the internet.

<comment><USER3> I've been hosting my own mail for more, than a decade. It pays off; eg. I can access it even in China, unlike gmail.

Despite the myths, it's not _that_ hard to set it up, but you do need your clean own ipv4 address for everything to go smooth - I mean go around and get it off blacklists before you actually start using it as mail server. Test it here: [https://mxtoolbox.com/blacklists.aspx](https://mxtoolbox.com/blacklists.aspx)

Once that's done, things like SPF, DKIM, DMARC are time consuming to set up, but not particularly hard or tricky, and there are tonnes of good guides out there.

<comment><USER4> I had my own mail service. I switched to gmail when it first came out because the spam filtering was much much better than anything than available to the public. Kind of like why I switched from altavista to google search.

What's the spam filtering picture like for DIY these days?

<comment><USER3> Greylisting + weighted dnsbl from multiple sources stops the majority of it. The remaining can be caught even with bogofilter.

<comment><USER4> How's the false positive rate?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> As an aside, this is a superbly professional e-mail, with clear references to the applicable standards, and the disapproval of the broken service stated firmly, but using clean language. Does anybody really think that Linus' (hopefully) past practice of starting with a foul mouthed rant, and only drilling down into the technical detail three pages in was a more effective way of communicating?

<comment><USER6> It wasn't "past practice". Linus' rants were a rare event, in case of major "sins" commited by core contributors. They are what made it out in the open, but a lot of Linus' messages in the mailing lists is actually a sane, technical discussion.

<comment><USER7> I recall Linus calling some filesystem brain-dead (-damaged?). Could be [1] or [2], but I'm getting a cloudflare error when I try to visit the links. Not as bombastic as some of his rants, but this email is much more professional.

[1] [http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version- control.git/70688...](http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version- control.git/70688/focus=71348)

[2] [http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version- control.git/7076...](http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version- control.git/70760)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Here's a copy of the thread with a light color scheme: [https://marc.info/?l=git&m=155260711429449&w=2](https://marc.info/?l=git&m=155260711429449&w=2)

<comment><USER9> It _has_ a light color scheme, if your browser supports the media query `screen AND (prefers-color-scheme:light)`. Currently that's Safari 12.1, and Firefox beta channel or later.

(I run Nightly, so I was initially puzzled by your comment, since I was seeing it light.)

<comment><USER8> I had no idea. Cool!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It's tempting to pile on Gmail and its monopoly and use this as an example of them "taking over" email but at the same time this type of ossification for long-used protocols is fairly common in my experience. In practice everybody ends up relying on a safe subset of the spec that everybody is expected to understand correctly.

Try implementing a fuzzer for HTTP, SMTP, NTP, USB-C, CD-ROM or, say, TLS that tests every obscure corner case of the spec and see how many implementations fail to conform.

Given that I wasn't aware of this issue before reading this email shows that it's probably not much of an issue in practice. I can imagine that whoever implemented this at Google took a shortcut originally, adding a "// XXX maybe we should allow arbitrary order for headers?" comment and it never turned out to be an issue in practice (better yet, it might help them discard bogus emails early in the pipeline).

Still, I can empathize with Linus's frustration, it's always annoying when you write technically correct code and it doesn't work because a third party didn't do it right.

<comment><USER11> >Given that I wasn't aware of this issue before reading this email shows that it's probably not much of an issue in practice

Two economists walk down a road. One of them says, "look, a $20 bill on the ground."

The other one says, "that's impossible, if there was money on the ground, someone would have picked it up already."

<comment><USER10> I don't understand how that applies to what I was saying. I was commenting that it's not an issue that crops up often in practice, which is probably why the engineers at GMail made the assumption that it could reasonably be ignored.

I'm not saying that it can never be an issue (this it obviously is in this case), I'm saying that it's not necessarily a bad engineering decision. Adding code to handle weird corner cases of a standard means adding code that won't be used 99.999% of the time (a number I pulled freshly out of my buttocks, but wouldn't be surprised if it was close to the truth in this case), that's more likely to rot, be poorly tested and become a maintenance liability.

I'm not saying people never find $20 bills on the ground, I'm saying that if most people routinely found $20 bills on the ground every other day we'd probably have heard about it by now. The fact that it only came to my attention in this email (and I hosts my own email server and have written SMTP clients and server code in the past) tells me that it's probably not such a widespread problem. If GMail started routinely bouncing incoming mail because they didn't support the standards correctly I'm sure we'd see an article or ten pop up on the front page of HN.

<comment><USER11> Maybe you're right. I just like that joke.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm more disappointed about the RFC than gmail... Publishing a specific syntax which uses specific ordering and just leaving a note that it's actually incorrect is a really bad way of writing specifications. RFCs should be really clear and explicit in things like that.

<comment><USER13> You are supposed to read the whole RFC (and then some more) when implementing it.

<comment><USER12> Sure, that's the theory. The practice is that people won't, and you either have to accept the bad implementations or make sure that everything is as explicit as possible. (And that you don't contradict yourself) If people implemented specs 100% correctly, we wouldn't have bugs.

Even without malice or incompetence, people will make mistakes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> > I have a very strong suspicion that it's easier to fix "git format-patch" > than it is to fix whatever odd gmail issue.

Third option: Update the RFC so that it's more opinionated and makes the ordering of the headers a mandatory part of the spec.

<comment><USER15> Have the entire world change their implementation rather than the one company which is doing it wrong?

This is not how RFCs work. There's a reason RFCs came about, and it was to prevent this exact type of situation. Just because a company has a large market share, doesn't mean RFCs should be changed to suit it.</comment></comment>